3 ms·

The answer is "it's complicated." See https://github.com/alfiedotwtf/AABillFAQ https://github.com/alfiedotwtf/AABillFAQ

mastazi 8y ago
Thank you for providing a better source - reality is more nuanced than what most news outlets want you to believe, but unfortunately hiring practices are influenced by public discourse, and unfortunately the prevalent message out there is "don't hire Australians"
- manigandham 8y ago
  No, business hiring is influenced by risk and value. Having any of this language is a risk that's just not worth it, especially because of how ambiguous and surreptitious this is. It's up to the citizens and their government to rectify such poor legislation.
- opportune 8y ago
  It might be cheaper foor a business to just not hire Australians than to hire a lawyer and dedicate bizdev time to figuring out the intricacies and nuance
  - viraptor 8y ago
    It is not cheaper than getting sued for discrimination. Which would be easily proven in many cases, seeing how many people are more afraid of a potential issue with another country's intelligence agencies then of publicly posting about their plans to violate their own employment laws.
    - A2017U1 8y ago
      That's absurd, not hiring a foreign national on security concerns is a daily event, can you name one discrimination case won for that?
      - viraptor 8y ago
        You're bringing up an valid exception validated by law. It's not the default and does not apply to almost all jobs out there. It's also usually applied as "only our nationals" rather than "not those specific other nationals" which would be the case for non-Australian. I'm not linking specific cases. (partially because you didn't specify which country you're taking any) A quick Google will bring you the specific laws, cases and lots of lawyers specifically advertising themselves to handle those cases.
    - village-idiot 8y ago
      You can’t be sued for discrimination based on the employees location, which is actually the issue at stake here. Citizenship doesn’t appear to be relevant.
      - viraptor 8y ago
        Parent posts are about citizenship, not location. Literally "not hire Australians".
        village-idiot 8y ago
        Later posts make it clear the law is actually about country, not citizenship. Non-citizen residents of Australia have the same risk factor as citizens.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
- Nasrudith 8y ago
  The fact we have to ask is unacceptable in the first place! The same way you shouldn't have to ask if there is polonium in your tea. Given the easiest and most sensible solution is the same in both cases - dump it because it isn't worth the risk.
cryptokernel 8y ago
Very much complicated. Just leaving this here: https://coincircle.com/l/50VVxbObg3 https://coincircle.com/l/50VVxbObg3

Thank you for providing a better source - reality is more nuanced than what most news outlets want you to believe, but unfortunately hiring practices are influenced by public discourse, and unfortunately the prevalent message out there is "don't hire Australians"

manigandham 8y ago
No, business hiring is influenced by risk and value. Having any of this language is a risk that's just not worth it, especially because of how ambiguous and surreptitious this is. It's up to the citizens and their government to rectify such poor legislation.
opportune 8y ago
It might be cheaper foor a business to just not hire Australians than to hire a lawyer and dedicate bizdev time to figuring out the intricacies and nuance
- viraptor 8y ago
  It is not cheaper than getting sued for discrimination. Which would be easily proven in many cases, seeing how many people are more afraid of a potential issue with another country's intelligence agencies then of publicly posting about their plans to violate their own employment laws.
  - A2017U1 8y ago
    That's absurd, not hiring a foreign national on security concerns is a daily event, can you name one discrimination case won for that?
    - viraptor 8y ago
      You're bringing up an valid exception validated by law. It's not the default and does not apply to almost all jobs out there. It's also usually applied as "only our nationals" rather than "not those specific other nationals" which would be the case for non-Australian. I'm not linking specific cases. (partially because you didn't specify which country you're taking any) A quick Google will bring you the specific laws, cases and lots of lawyers specifically advertising themselves to handle those cases.
  - village-idiot 8y ago
    You can’t be sued for discrimination based on the employees location, which is actually the issue at stake here. Citizenship doesn’t appear to be relevant.
    - viraptor 8y ago
      Parent posts are about citizenship, not location. Literally "not hire Australians".
      - village-idiot 8y ago
        Later posts make it clear the law is actually about country, not citizenship. Non-citizen residents of Australia have the same risk factor as citizens.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
Nasrudith 8y ago
The fact we have to ask is unacceptable in the first place! The same way you shouldn't have to ask if there is polonium in your tea. Given the easiest and most sensible solution is the same in both cases - dump it because it isn't worth the risk.

cryptokernel 8y ago

Very much complicated. Just leaving this here: https://coincircle.com/l/50VVxbObg3 https://coincircle.com/l/50VVxbObg3